RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] FW: (Microsoft XML Team's WebLog) : Mixing structured and unstructured content in MS Word

["Winters, Roger" <Roger.Winters@METROKC.GOV>]

TO: All

It will be interesting to explore these possibilities. I have trouble
deciphering acronyms I've never heard of and I keep hoping that sometime
they will come to light and the basic ideas will be expressed so I can
understand them. What are the pros and cons of one approach vs. another?
What are the business consequences or assumptions behind using one or
another? For example, is the idea about using this in E-Notarization
based on assumptions about notaries, attorneys, people in general, or is
it coming entirely from scientific technical reasons that can't be
controversial? Are there religious issues behind the approaches? (e.g.,
in Notarization is there a religious conservatism that calls for things
to resemble "traditional" approaches, or is that not an issue?) Will
this flavor of PDF work until Adobe clamps down in some future time and
takes free PDF reading away? A zillion questions come to mind for those
of us who are not adept at acronym-eze or tech-speak. 

I don't ask these questions seeking specific answers or defenses of
positions - I am too ignorant of all of this to have a position yet. I
ask them only to illustrate that we continue to have among us all a
language barrier. It does not seem to be a problem for those who are so
technically advanced that acronyms spill from their tongues as they
enthrall other technically advanced folks with brilliant new
possibilities. It is a problem when those of us who would love to
understand the possibilities find ourselves hopelessly lost because they
seem only to be speaking in tongues in which we have no experience. It
is not at all insulting to "dumb it down" for others.

That raises another consideration - if ECFTC does not make a certain
attainment of technical expertise a requirement for participation, is it
therefore a requirement that the rest engage in "dumbing it down" for
the rest? Who must take pains to bridge the communication gap? And it is
a gap and there is pain involved in trying to guess, beg for answers,
preach against acronyms, etc. How can we work together if we do not find
the bridges and translations needed to understand one another? Could XML
come to our rescue by some "schema" (still not sure I can explain that
idea to others) that processes the terms somehow so that a "dummies"
version is generated as well?

Did I miss the prerequisite classes that everyone else took and aced?

Happy MLK Weekend!

Roger

Roger Winters
Program and Project Manager
and
Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Coordinator
King County
Department of Judicial Administration
516 Third Ave. E-609 MS:KCC-JA-0609
Seattle, WA 98104
V: (206) 296-7838
F: (206) 296-0906
roger.winters@metrokc.gov
 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Messing [mailto:jmessing@law-on-line.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 4:24 PM
To: Hickman,Brian
Cc: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org; O'Brien,Robert
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] FW: (Microsoft XML Team's WebLog) :
Mixing structured and unstructured content in MS Word

An alternative is Adobe's XFA format which enables XML schema's to
generate PDF layout documents. It is ideal for form-based documents.
This likely will be the document format structure that eNotary will use
for the layout of its form-based notary certificates, jurats and
acknowledgements.

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] FW: (Microsoft XML Team's WebLog) :
> Mixing structured and unstructured content in MS Word
> From: "Hickman, Brian" <Brian.Hickman@wolterskluwer.com>
> Date: Fri, January 12, 2007 4:53 pm
> To: <legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org>, "O'Brien,Robert"
> <Robert.OBrien@cas-satj.gc.ca>
> 
> After reading Roger Winters and John Messing's posts on embedding
> structured and unstructured content in a pleading I thought I would
ask
> Microsoft's XML team to recommend a method to add structured / machine
> readable content to an MS Word document that also contains
unstructured
> / narrative content.  
> 
> I am forwarding Microsoft's response for your review.
> 
> Brian Hickman 
> Attorney
> Government Relations
> CT
> 
> 
> 520 Pike Street, Suite 2610
> Seattle, WA 98101 
> 206 622 4511 (tel)
> 206 437 1766 (mobile)
> brian.hickman@wolterskluwer.com
>  
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Jones (OFFICE) [mailto:brijones@exchange.microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 1:30 PM
> To: Adam Wiener; Michael Champion; Hickman, Brian; Steven Goulet; Doug
> Mahugh; Gray Knowlton
> Subject: RE: (Microsoft XML Team's WebLog) : Mixing structured and
> unstructured content in MS Word
> 
> Hi Brian,
> The model in both Word 2003 and 2007 is to allow you to add your
custom
> XML markup to a Word document so that it lives alongside the
formatting
> and layout information.
> The validation occurs on your schema on its own, even though there is
> also WordprocessingML whenever you save the file.
> 
> It's recommended that you leverage the Word structures as much as
> possible, and only add your own XML markup for persisting semantics
that
> can't be captured with the Word model.
> I would also suggest learning more about the new content controls
> feature in Word 2007. This allows you to add more structure on top of
> your Word documents. There is a series of blog posts on the Word blog
> that cover this, and I just recently blogged about the post that
covers
> mapping custom XML to content controls:
>
http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/01/10/the-power-of-data-v
> iew-separation-in-your-documents.aspx
> 
> 
> -Brian
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Wiener
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 12:13 PM
> To: Adam Wiener; Michael Champion; brian.hickman@wolterskluwer.com;
> Brian Jones (OFFICE); Steven Goulet; Doug Mahugh; Gray Knowlton
> Subject: RE: (Microsoft XML Team's WebLog) : Mixing structured and
> unstructured content in MS Word
> 
> Adding Doug and Gray as well... XML Bloggers on bcc...
> 
> Thanks,
> Adam
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Wiener
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:32 AM
> To: Michael Champion; brian.hickman@wolterskluwer.com; Xml Team
> Bloggers; Brian Jones (OFFICE); Steven Goulet
> Subject: RE: (Microsoft XML Team's WebLog) : Mixing structured and
> unstructured content in MS Word
> 
> Looping in Brian Jones and Steven Goulet...
> 
> Can you please take a look at Mr. Hickman's question below?
> 
> Thanks,
> Adam
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Champion
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:29 PM
> To: brian.hickman@wolterskluwer.com; Xml Team Bloggers
> Subject: RE: (Microsoft XML Team's WebLog) : Mixing structured and
> unstructured content in MS Word
> 
> Thanks for your inquiry.  The people on this list are not Word
experts,
> so I'll try to find someone in the Office team who can answer.  (Or,
if
> one of you on the XML team does know the answer, feel free to chime
in!)
> 
> I know that you can edit documents that conform to a custom schema in
> Word 2003 and 2007.
> http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2006/01/25/517739.aspx
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/03/11/XMLFiles/
> 
>  I don't know about mixing structured (custom schema) and unstructured
> (default Word schema) in one doc, however, if that is what you are
> asking.   Please let me know if you don't hear back from someone in
> Office in a timely manner and I'll try to follow up.
> 
> Mike Champion
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: brian.hickman@wolterskluwer.com
> [mailto:brian.hickman@wolterskluwer.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:42 PM
> > To: Xml Team Bloggers
> > Subject: (Microsoft XML Team's WebLog) : Mixing structured and
> unstructured
> > content in MS Word
> > Importance: High
> >
> >
> > I am a member of OASIS LegalXML's Electronic Court Filing Technical
> Committee
> > and an attorney with CT Corporation.  The  goal of the technical
> committee is
> > to develop standards to file documents electronically with courts.
> Today,
> > most documents produced by the legal industry are produced in MS
Word.
> > Unfortunately, today, a human must read the document at the
courthouse
> to
> > extract data from the document to populate the court's case
management
> system.
> > My question is:  Can we integrate content that conforms to a custom
> data model
> > into MS Word such that structured content and unstructured content
can
> reside
> > in the same document?  If the case management system could extract
> content
> > from an MS Word file that conformed to a customize data model (i'm
> thinking
> > along the lines of adding an MS Scheme that matched the court's
> requirements)
> > then an automated process could extract data directly from the MS
Word
> file.
> >
> > If you look at a legal pleading you will see that some sections of
the
> > document are structured and conform to a data model that conforms to
a
> set of
> > rules expressed by the court in narrative format and some parts of
the
> > document are almost unstructured, such a a paragraph of narrative.
> >
> > What approach would you recommend to allow attorneys to use the tool
> they are
> > familiar with, MS Word, and still embed some machine readable
content
> within
> > the MS Word document?
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Brian Hickman
> > ----------------------------------
> > This message was generated from a contact form at:
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/xmlteam/default.aspx
> > It was submitted by Brian Hickman (brian.hickman@wolterskluwer.com)
> >
> > Your contact information was not shared with the user.